Page titles

Shawn: It has been edited a bit,
basically the same template. You're encouraged to fix typos and
such as you find them. For today, let's discuss overall tone,
content, sensability and high level observations.

Ian: The part where we say Chrome
and others don't display, we could add the possibility of
adding as a Bookmark which will reveal titles.
... and in many browsers even if it is displayed if it is long,
it may not display all of it. So there are challenges with all
of them really.

Shawn: Is the another way to look
at titles other than Bookmarks?

Liam: You can mouse over the tab
and the full title is revealed.
... not sure about Opera.

Shawn: Yes, I just tried it, it
does. Wonder if there is a non-mouse way to check?

Jennifer: I am boggled that
titles don't play that big a role for sighted people.

Shawn: reads from text "The first
thing..." Do we want to say more? Is it strong enought? Should
we say more?

Jennifer: I just don't even think
about it. Will try to rememeber to check. I don't want to add
length or complexity but it is important to orient among
multiple open windows or tabs.

Shawn: Maybe we need to say it is
what shows up in the browser tab. (adds note)

Bim: If you want to highlight the
importance, it is a good confimrantion that I have actually
gotten to the link I chose. When you have different browsers
open, the unique title becomes important. Have the specific
page title first followed by the general web site.

Shawn: Anything else about the
Page title section?

AnnaBelle: Do we want to mention
SEO even though it is not directly related to
accessibility?

Shawn: I was reluctant to change
the focus from accessibility, but I did make a mention, not a
detailed discussion.

Bim: IN what to look for, you
have adequate title, unique. Should include that it is even
titled. That a title exists - that it is present and then that
it is adequate.

Shawn: Back to SEO mention...is
it enough, too much?

Jennifer: Leave it as is

Liam: The reader of this is not
someone who needs to be persuaded, would be happy leaving as is
or even removing it.

Bim: It is a good balance.

Anna Belle: Leave it in, good grounding for
those who know about it.

Ian: And even if they don't need
to be convinced, they may need to convince others.

Shawn: So once you do this, what
next? Do we need to add a section about what ot do?

Easy Checks Headings Section

Shawn: This one is a bit
different format, we can look at that? Intro, what to check for
and specific steps on how to do it. Currently it has the
validator, Firefox toolbar and BAD as tools. Any comments?

Liam: Is it allowed to complain
without a solution?
... the issues we tend to have when teaching this in classes is
that with the nested hierarchy, h3 belongs within an h2 etc and
then you use a new h2 when introducing a new topic. It is a
difficult concept for people to grasp for some reason.

Shawn: While the purpose here is
not to teach how to create good headings, do we want to provide
more guidance about what to look for?

Suzette: What does WCAG2 say?

Shawn: Used to organizae content,
but not hierarchy.

Sharron: Are you saying the
Guideline does not promote hierarchy?

Liam: The Techniques documents
do.

Shawn: Now we have linked to the
Understanding documents that then will further link to the
Techniques. Do we want to link to Techniques if they are are
particularly relevant?

Liam: (provides techniques to
link to...)
... I got them by following through Techniques

Shawn: OK I have added those
links.
... any further comments about the level of detail, approach,
are these the right checks to inlcude? Do you ahve anything
other to recommend?

Liam: The information and View
Document outline.
... outline headings can be unreliable.
... looks good, we can always come back and change if
needed.

Shawn: Question for BAD use,
Shadi?

Shadi: No we have an example of a
heading that is not really a heading, but not one where the
heading markup is omitted.

Shawn: It would be nice to have a
page with no headings as an example to see what you would get
in the vlaidator.

Liam: Wait - in the BAD demo
there is no heading on the interior BEFORE pages and there are
nicely nested headings on the AFTER pages.

shawn: But there are headings on
the meta pages.

Bim: I find lists of links where
each one is an h3 or h5 for some reason. Developers may be
thinking that if a link leads to a page, it is in need of a
heading.

Liam: And where every item in the
navigation is a heading.

Bim: And screen readers will read
all of them, you can't target only h2s without reading through
all of them, following the heading level.
... so much page noise.

Shawn: Would you be able to
consider marking this up for the next version of BAD?

Shadi: Yes, but I don't see how
we can do that without metapage headings. But regarding the
other one, I will add it to the list.

<trackbot> Created ACTION-267
- Add to the BAD wishlist "marked up headings that should not
be headings" [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2013-02-01].

Jennifer: So following on Bim's
comment, we can remove my suggestion in the notes about
consistency.

Liam, Bim: Discussion of how screen reader
navigate through headings

Suzette: I was looking at the
news page on BAD and there is a lack of proper headings that is
referenced differently in the Before than the After
versions.

Liam: Yes 1.3.1 is an excellent
citation for that.

Suzette: But 2.4.6 is called
Headings and Labels and is a level AA criteria

Bim: It seems under successive
levels there is increased granularity.

Shadi: We had some discussion
about this. The reason we connected that is first the focus on
level A. It is the same heading just marked up differently so
we felt it was realted more closely to the intent of 1.3.1,
focused on the markup. So that is the rationale, but please
submit questions or comments.

Shawn: Review Bim's comment and
let's discuss if we need to add more to linked images.
... what more would we say about those?
... or I can put a placeholder and Bim or Suzette can add to
it.

Liam: I enjoyed the comment about
it not being an exact science.
... Liam reads the section "Appropriate alt text is not an
exact science. Some people prefer more description of more
images; and others prefer less description.
... Can I throw a test case? Main log in with three buttons,
Clear, Continue, Forgot password. Alt text was empty. In that
case there is no difference of opinion on ones like that.
... So to emphasize that the critical functional issues must be
found in the Quick Checks.

Bim: Would it be worth a "in
cases other than where your alt text is not essential, such as
functional icons,..." comment.

Liam: If the image is not
important, is only decoration, empty alt is proper. That may be
the right place to say that if an image is actionable, it
really must have a text equivalent.

Shawn: Seems like we may want to
do a bit more on that point.
... there is a lot here for an Easy Check. Is there something
that can be removed? Anything essential needed in the Tips?

Suzette: I took the Tips and
reorganized them a bit and numbered them. Tried to put the
things that you have to do first.
... it had seemed randome, I tried to add a bit of logic.

Shawn: We may add
sub-bullets
... is this what you have someone do who is learning about
this? or something different?
... we have looked at sections that have a consistent approach.
Sharron and Suzette, you are looking at a couple of sections
that have a different format. You should use the organziation
that works best for the topic and we will look at that when
they get to this level.

Two Levels of Checks

Shawn: We had been working with
the idea that we would have the 5 minute drive by check. 5
things in 5 minutes kind of approach and then also have the
"Deeper Look" section.
... what we have found so far, something like Page Title that
should be very very simple become more complicated depending on
browser. Other may be tool dependent.
... If we had heading checks in the first section, it would ask
to use WAVE and validator, which is more complex than what we
would have in the Deeper Look, where using the FF toolbar is
actually easier.
... also we have pared down the list so it is fairly short.
Should we then have just one list?
... or should we keep the original plan for two?

Liam: With just one section would
we get it published sooner?

Shawn: Probably

Bim: One section makes sense to
me. Inexpert users are our target. The five minute target is
not realistic. Fifteen minutes, with a bit of experience is
reasonable.
... Let people know they will ahve to dedicate at leat 15
minutes.

Shawn: Good point and we had not
decided to assign time to this part. Anyone want to keep two
sections? Any objections to making just one?

RESOLUTION: Agreed
to omit the two section organziation and to make Easy Checks
one thing.

How detailed need the instruction be for
BAD?

Shawn: The issue is for example,
on the alt text section we have very detailed instruction on
how to check with the validator, in the FF toolbar, and on any
browser.
... then we say try it with BAD
... one approach would be to repeat those instructions in the
same level of detail saying put this BAD page in and here is
what you will see. Advantage is it is really easy to
understand. However, it is a lot of text.

Jennifer: and maintenence becomes
an issue.

Shawn: Other possibility is to
say "follow the instructions above on this page." and look for
these outcomes.

Jennifer: Option 2

Bim: Option2

<hbj> Option 2

Anna Belle: I really like BAD but I am not
comfortable with interspersing it within this document. I am
not sure I would use it the way it is suggested.

Shawn: This is not meant to be a
tutorial about how to use BAD but you might be confused when
you are testing pages that fail. So the idea was to show how
the check itself might work. You bring up a good point that
people will print out the document.

<shadi> +1 to expand/collapse
this extra info!

Anna Belle: So BAD is used as a validator of
your testing techniques?

Shawn: Yes soemone who just wants
to know how to use the easy chacks.

Jennifer: Maintenence

Shawn: You can see now that there
are various introduction lengths, from paragraphs to a few
short sentences.
... thoughts about what to do about BAD? do we want to remove
it to a separate page?

Liam: It may remove a level of
complexity

Shadi: What if we continue to
develop in unison a we have been doing but put the BAD sections
in an expand/collapse? Then we can decide later if it needs to
be put in another document.
... I kind of like having it here. May add complexity to put on
another page.
... the process of looking for examples is useful.

Shawn: That will be a hard
decision I think. So let's take the middle path. Not add all
the steps but use BAD as an example when possible. Keep in mind
as we continue to develop what the final best option will
be.

Bim: Repetition of term
"accssibility barriers" is discordant with a screen reader

Helle: Could we make it stronger
in the third by saying significant? Is that necessary?

Shane: We can flag these for word
smithing.

Helle: What about ending third
paragraph earlier?

Shawn: A version did that but
seemed to end on a negative.

Sharron: Could combine sentences,
onit the last and have a very crisp introcution. "These checks
are designed to be quick and easy, rather than definitive and
cover jsut a few accessibility issues."

Shawn: Is this the right amount
of information, need to say more, less?

<AnnaBelle> +1 to checklist
idea

Helle: If you want a check list,
and point them to it?

Shawn: I on't understand
... you mean a chack list for these items that allow for Yes No
Maybe?

Helle: Yes something like that
but I have not thought it through.

Shawn: It may take more time than
what we can do in this first iteration, but may add for the
future. How to document your findings. Especially if you are
sending off to somewhere or someone else.
... anything else?

Sharron: I am happy, I think it
is good

Jennifer: No strong opinions

Helle: The FF toolbar may need to
be part of tools...

Shawn: I have notes to make a few
changes but otherwise, we will not go look at this again unless
future issues are raised.

Next Steps for Easy Checks

Shawn: Ian you ahve the
assignement to look at a few items, rought drafts for us to
review for inclusion here.

Ian: Yes I have mostly written an
explanation of the differences. I will submit and see if it is
worth having a check for.

Shawn: Ther is some stuff drafted
in there about text resizing
... the issue would not so much be explaining it but whether it
belongs in a list of quick checks. You could edit what is there
based on your research.

Ian: OK I will do that this
week.

Shawn: If you can get it to us on
Wednesday we will ahve a day for review.
... Sharron and Suzette you are working on a couple of
sections?

Sharron: Yes Suzette took a pass
I have not reviewed.

Shawn: Suzette, you may notice I
left in the contents list a mention of Links in case you still
want to advoicate for inclusion here.
... otehr section that has not yet been assigned "Color
Contrast" Much text is there, needs to be pared down, do we
have a volunteer?

Helle: I am on holiday starting
in 10 minutes.

Shawn: Anna Belle, can you add
the Color/Contrast section to your list of To-Dos
... pare down the text that is there?

Anna Belle: If it is simple text editing, I am
happy to do it.

Shawn: If you can take the
content of that section and format it in the way the other
sections are organized.

Sharron: I will work with you on
it Anna Belle

Shawn: Jennifer can you draft a
section on what to do next? with the findings from tehse
tests?

Jennifer: If you can give me an
idea of what you want in this section?
... how to write a good bug report?

Shawn: More about what do you do
with this - based on Ian's comment to encourage people to
report. Maybe point to How PWD use the Web, How to report,
etc

Ian: There is a minimum level of
detail that makes a good bug report. Why it is a problem, where
it is found, any idea about how to fix.

Helle: If you are making an
internal report would it be useful to say there are things that
you can do yourelf, but you may need to report on things that
are generated from CMS and so would need to report to the CMS
managers.

Jennifer: OK I will draft
soemthing so we have a starting point for discussion.

Shawn: Thanks all. Who will be at
the F2F?

Jennifer: I am planning to
come.

Ian: I am not coming, I will be
there Tuesday evening but not before.

Helle: I will be there only for
the F2F

Shawn: Thanks all, we're doing
good. We are trying to get a draft of this for CSUN.